Is Adrien Broner a elite, good, mediocre or a bad fighter?

[-Kev-]

Mikey is being praised for what he did to Broner, but in the same sentence by the same posters, Broner is a bad fighter.

Should fighters get praise for what they do to bad/mediocre fighters?

For the record, I do think Broner is above average (good) and I give Mikey Garcia credit for the way he easily handled him, he showed he's elite and he showed Broner, while above average, just isn't on that level of elite. But I don't think Broner is mediocre, or even a bad fighter like a lot of people say.

I just find it bizarre that people want it both ways. They want to say how great Mikey is for winning, but they also want to say how bad of a fighter Broner is...like almost taking the credit away right back from Mikey.

[SkillspayBills]

He's a B level fighter with noticeable flaws. The blueprint is out to beat the guy. You can't win a fight throwing only 20 punches in a round. What's the point to of punching the heavy bag 2000 times to only throw 300 punches ON 12 ****ING ROUNDS.

[TheCell8]

He's mediocre. Definitely not a scrub, but he also can't be considered elite either. He has the tools to be great. Fast hands, power, but he needs better guidance. Mike Stafford is clearly not the right trainer for him. He needs to make the decision soon.

[Mexican_Puppet]

Mediocre.

He is worst than Chavez Jr.

And one of the most overrated fighters in the history of boxing

[-Kev-]

He's a B level fighter with noticeable flaws. The blueprint is out to beat the guy. You can't win a fight throwing only 20 punches in a round. What's the point to of punching the heavy bag 2000 times to only throw 300 punches ON 12 ****ING ROUNDS.

The thing with Broner is:

He was once #6 P4P.
He has won titles in 4 weight classes.
He has inconsistently beaten top 10 ranked fighters.
He beats borderline good/mediocre fighters (Grandados, Malignaggi, DeMarco, Khabib, Taylor).

I'm trying to argue that this was a pretty good win for Mikey because he beat a good fighter. But I don't understand why others are saying it's a good win for Mikey, but Broner is a bad fighter? Can they have it both ways? It makes no sense.

[-Kev-]

Mediocre.

He is worst than Chavez Jr.

And one of the most overrated fighters in the history of boxing

So you don't rate this win for Mikey then? Or you rate it at the bottom? Like below Burgos?

[Mammoth]

Oh man... He's Chavez Jr level now. The comparison can be made....

[Dean_Razorback]

a little bit above average

[Chollo Vista]

Mikey is being praised for what he did to Broner, but in the same sentence by the same posters, Broner is a bad fighter.

Should fighters get praise for what they do to bad/mediocre fighters?

For the record, I do think Broner is above average (good) and I give Mikey Garcia credit for the way he easily handled him, he showed he's elite and he showed Broner, while above average, just isn't on that level of elite. But I don't think Broner is mediocre, or even a bad fighter like a lot of people say.

I just find it bizarre that people want it both ways. They want to say how great Mikey is for winning, but they also want to say how bad of a fighter Broner is...like almost taking the credit away right back from Mikey.

It was a great win for Mikey because he went up another weight class.

Broner just isn't that good. Really hasn't been since the DeMarco fight

[Mexican_Puppet]

So you don't rate this win for Mikey then? Or you rate it at the bottom? Like below Burgos?

A little better than Burgos.